The Lie of Evolution from a Credible Scientist

Originally posted by Deetermined
Once again, I'll point out that no one has suggested that mutations don't take place and that life does not evolve, only that the process may not
have originated the way science thinks it did.

Seems at odds with this previous statement of yours no?

anything related to humans is entirely by design. Humans did not evolve from anything else.

You are correct. I believe that evolution exists, but I don't believe that humans have ever evolved from anything that wasn't already human. I
believe it to be a process for certain life forms on earth, but not all. Not humans. Although I believe it exists, I believe it is
limited.

With regards to Enochwasright's use of the term "consciousness", I believe he was talking about God. With that in mind, maybe that wasn't the way he
intended it, but that's the way I perceived it.

God is of a spiritual nature, therefore, my term of Spirit Conscious.

I know some people on ATS regard God as the Universe itself, but I don't, and I don't believe Enochwasright does either. If Enochwasright was what I
call a "Universalist" (believing in Universalism, where the Universe is God), I don't believe he would be quoting scriptures from the Bible. The fact
that he believes in the God of the Bible, tells me that he is speaking about a God who is also known as the Holy Spirit, hence where Spiritual
Consciousness comes from.

With that said, I believe humans to be spiritual creatures (with a soul) and with a physical body. God speaks to humans through the Holy Spirit. So,
when you combine physical with spiritual, you have to take into consideration that our conscious is also tied to the spiritual conscious.

I hope this explanation helps in explaining some of my comments made on this thread or at least why I believe that humans did not evolve from some
other life form.

You are correct. I believe that evolution exists, but I don't believe that humans have ever evolved from anything that wasn't already human.
I believe it to be a process for certain life forms on earth, but not all. Not humans. Although I believe it exists, I believe it is limited.

So which is it?

Do you think humans have only ever evolved from other members of the genus such as Homo neanderthalensis or Homo rhodesiensis

With regards to Enochwasright's use of the term "consciousness", I believe he was talking about God. With that in mind, maybe that wasn't the way
he intended it, but that's the way I perceived it.

God is of a spiritual nature, therefore, my term of Spirit Conscious.

I know some people on ATS regard God as the Universe itself, but I don't, and I don't believe Enochwasright does either. If Enochwasright was what
I call a "Universalist" (believing in Universalism, where the Universe is God), I don't believe he would be quoting scriptures from the Bible. The
fact that he believes in the God of the Bible, tells me that he is speaking about a God who is also known as the Holy Spirit, hence where Spiritual
Consciousness comes from.

With that said, I believe humans to be spiritual creatures (with a soul) and with a physical body. God speaks to humans through the Holy Spirit. So,
when you combine physical with spiritual, you have to take into consideration that our conscious is also tied to the spiritual conscious.

I hope this explanation helps in explaining some of my comments made on this thread or at least why I believe that humans did not evolve from some
other life form.

I'm sure everyone here was fully aware that SuperiorEnochwasaBandteacher and yourself were referring to some kind of supernatural being when talking
about disembodied consciousness, don't be under any illusion about that.

All thats needed now is for you, or anyone else, to verify your claims and we can finally chew it over.

Until then you are both merely making idle speculation that no-one (who hasn't already made up their mind) is going to take seriously...

And your reason for believing that humans are exempt from the evolutionary process......'god did it'

With regards to Enochwasright's use of the term "consciousness", I believe he was talking about God. With that in mind, maybe that wasn't the way
he intended it, but that's the way I perceived it.

God is of a spiritual nature, therefore, my term of Spirit Conscious.

I know some people on ATS regard God as the Universe itself, but I don't, and I don't believe Enochwasright does either. If Enochwasright was what
I call a "Universalist" (believing in Universalism, where the Universe is God), I don't believe he would be quoting scriptures from the Bible. The
fact that he believes in the God of the Bible, tells me that he is speaking about a God who is also known as the Holy Spirit, hence where Spiritual
Consciousness comes from.

With that said, I believe humans to be spiritual creatures (with a soul) and with a physical body. God speaks to humans through the Holy Spirit. So,
when you combine physical with spiritual, you have to take into consideration that our conscious is also tied to the spiritual conscious.

I hope this explanation helps in explaining some of my comments made on this thread or at least why I believe that humans did not evolve from some
other life form.

edit on 23-3-2012 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-3-2012 by Deetermined because: (no
reason given)

This is best understood by knowing that there is no material outside of God for the universe. God is all that is, was or will be. God refuses to be
represented by matter or any living creature. He is more. Spirit is consciousness and Holy Spirit is God's consciousness that is offered to us. We
are projections in an image of light. If we simplify the Trinity, it is the same fundamental grouping that makes up man. Our bodies are particle and
wave (Duality of light) and also consciousness. God is Father (Light), Son (Word / Wave) and Holy Spirit. The three things that make up the image of
God are how we are also in God's image. We are represented here in two ways. We are inside the image. We are the same image in reflection.

Genesis 1:27

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

When we see anything around us, we see God from the light. God is also hidden by the light.

Gospel of Thomas

83 Jesus said, "Images are visible to people, but the light within them is hidden in the image of the Father's light. He will be disclosed, but his
image is hidden by his light."

Actually a person never actually sees what they are looking at...what they DO SEE is the reflection of Photons from a light source...ie...the Sun...a
Lamp...a Chemical Glow Stick....reflecting off something and picked up by our eyes. The entire explaination how the Human Eye Works and how we
actually see everything unside down but our Brain reverses the picture around....I will pass on. But I have never understood why some people
associate Light so much with GOD.

I guess a few thousand years ago...needing the Sun to be warm or grow something to eat would be high on my priority. Split Infinity

I'm sure everyone here was fully aware that SuperiorEnochwasaBandteacher and yourself were referring to some kind of supernatural being when talking
about disembodied consciousness, don't be under any illusion about that.

All thats needed now is for you, or anyone else, to verify your claims and we can finally chew it over.

Until then you are both merely making idle speculation that no-one (who hasn't already made up their mind) is going to take seriously...

And your reason for believing that humans are exempt from the evolutionary process......'god did it'

What???

That's just it, the reason both sides have never come together is because neither is capable of "proving" anything in man's terms, so I wouldn't be
looking for proof of spirit, unless you're open enough to listen to other people who claim they have experienced it. Take ChaoticOrder for example.
Someone who claims to have had spiritual experiences that science would say is bogus, but clearly believes in science more than God. He/she claims
that these experiences can probably be explained through some scientific theory, but not all. In other words, there is no explanation for it, nor
will there ever be, without faith. Unfortunately, most people won't develop faith until they've had a personal spiritual experience of their own, and
even that can be questionable. How much proof is enough? Probably none.

Yes, I believe humans are exempt from the evolutionary process. The Bible tells us that earth and all of it's lifeforms and inhabitants (that aren't
man) were created especially for man and that man was put here to control all of it and to use everything in it for their own purposes, as well as for
God's. God even told Adam to be the one to name all the beasts on the earth.

In reality, I don't expect either side to ever come up with all the proof. God will have to provide that proof himself at a time that is outlined and
discussed in the Bible, if only everyone would take the time to read it.

Do not put your faith in man to come up with all of the answers. They were never intended to have it. I think we've been given plenty of "proof" as
to why we should NOT put our faith in man. It will only lead down a road of destruction, not answers.

ETA: People need to start exercising their spirit instead of only their minds for them to work together. Everyone has a spirit, but they don't
realize it, because they don't exercise it. Prayer helps.

Originally posted by Deetermined
My point, much like you stated about the unicorn, is that there are aspects to human life that science will never be able to determine because it's
not entirely physical, it's spiritual too. I'm not trying to imply that "scientific proof" means nothing, but the proof that exists will never reach
a total/final conclusion based on my previous sentence.

That's not necessarily true. Science continues to advance. There's a very good chance that we will be able to do that kind of stuff one day. For
for now we can't, so there's no evidence that it exists. When I say that, I'm not saying its false. Just that its not backed by evidence, and
therefor cannot be compared to science.

You're right. I can't help you to see perfection, just as you can't help me to see chaos at work. I can only try to point out observations
that might lead us to believe that all things work together in unison.

You didn't give me any observations of the perfectness. You said it was perfect and called it a day. We can measure forces (laws) in the universe.
Just because its possible doesn't mean it was created.

It's not hard to accept science. It's only hard to accept it as the final word or thought when there's so little that has been discovered
compared to what's out there to be researched.

Science itself doesn't consider it the final word! That's why I said it constantly evolves as new knowledge is available. That's how it works. It's
our best understanding based on the current level of knowledge. We are a tiny spec, on a tiny planet, with a tiny star, in a huge galaxy, in a HUGE
universe. Compared to the universe itself we are extremely microscopic. Of course we won't know absolutely everything. It is not possible.

The problem is thinking that those who question or criticize evolution don't know anything about it. Are you telling me that no reputable
scientist has ever questioned it? If scientists weren't constantly questioning each other, we'd probably never have proof of anything, nor would it
ever advance.

Exactly what I said. You can't criticize if you aren't knowledgeable hence why scientists are the ones that question their respective theories and
hypotheses. Not lay folks like on this message forum that constantly claim they know more than people who have studied it their entire lives.

By the way, has anyone claimed on this thread that evolution does not exist? All I've read OVER and OVER is the suggestion that maybe a higher
consciousness created the push/laws to start the evolution process. If you don't have a problem with a God doing the pushing, why does everyone
appear to be taking this so personally? Because it really appears that way to me. In the meanwhile, we can hope that science and spiritually come
together some day, but I'm not betting on it.

The claim in this thread is that evolution is not a cause. It clearly is. That is blatantly false and every time I mention it, the OP ignores that
fact. I only have a problem when people say that complexity means proof. God is just a hypothesis at this point. If the beauty, complexity and
amazingness of nature help you justify your faith, then more power to you. It isn't proof, or anything at all more than personal opinion however. I
can respect it as opinion. Maybe I got a little OT with evolution mechanics, but when the thread title says "The lie of evolution", it is very
misleading, and the complexity = design opinion has been done to death in this section. I'm always skeptical when people promote their religion by
focusing on deception and false assumptions about science, rather than the positives of their belief system.

You are correct. I believe that evolution exists, but I don't believe that humans have ever evolved from anything that wasn't already human. I
believe it to be a process for certain life forms on earth, but not all. Not humans. Although I believe it exists, I believe it is limited.

Nobody's arguing evolution? How do you explain the fact that we have mapped the entire human genome, and can measure the mutations from generation to
generation? What about the fossils of the many hominid species that came before homo sapiens. We've mapped the genome of Neanderthals and others
that share a common ancestor. Humans today are different from humans just 30,000 years ago. The homo genus has been evolving and changing for 2.5
million years. Ardipithicus ramidus and Australopithecus are not human. But here we go, you are doing exactly what I described above. Criticizing a
field of science that has hard evidence behind it, when you have not even done the research behind it to make such a claim. The very basics of
evolution are slow change over time. You don't just suddenly have a human pop up out of an ape. This is why I'm so critical of threads like this.
At least learn the basics.

Nobody's arguing evolution? How do you explain the fact that we have mapped the entire human genome, and can measure the mutations from generation to
generation? What about the fossils of the many hominid species that came before homo sapiens. We've mapped the genome of Neanderthals and others
that share a common ancestor. Humans today are different from humans just 30,000 years ago. The homo genus has been evolving and changing for 2.5
million years. Ardipithicus ramidus and Australopithecus are not human. But here we go, you are doing exactly what I described above. Criticizing a
field of science that has hard evidence behind it, when you have not even done the research behind it to make such a claim. The very basics of
evolution are slow change over time. You don't just suddenly have a human pop up out of an ape. This is why I'm so critical of threads like
this.

I'm sure humans have evolved over the years, since the Bible says the first human lifespans were close to 1,000 years. But we have always been a
critical thinking and emotional human from the beginning, not an animal/ape that evolved into a human. God appointed man above the animals from the
beginning to rule over them.

By the way, I have yet to find any information on the human genome project or neanderthal genome project that shows that they are complete or are not
"riddled with errors".

Originally posted by Deetermined
since the Bible says the first human lifespans were close to 1,000 years. But we have always been a critical thinking and emotional human from the
beginning, not an animal/ape that evolved into a human. God appointed man above the animals from the beginning to rule over them.

It says so in the Bible, so it must be true. I'm rather sick & tired of "proving" evolution to evolution deniers, so from now on both sides have to
put forth equal amounts of evidence. So, prove that humans used to live close to 1,000 years. Prove that the Bible is true.

If quoting books is enough evidence, I can say that humans never lived close to 1,000 years. Actual empirical evidence supports my book, and
everything in it can be falsified. In short, you're losing. What now?

Originally posted by Deetermined
I'm sure humans have evolved over the years, since the Bible says the first human lifespans were close to 1,000 years. But we have always been a
critical thinking and emotional human from the beginning, not an animal/ape that evolved into a human. God appointed man above the animals from the
beginning to rule over them.

By the way, I have yet to find any information on the human genome project or neanderthal genome project that shows that they are complete or are not
"riddled with errors".

The bible is not a science book, nor is it a veritably accurate source for anything. Sorry, the evidence points to evolution of ALL creatures on
earth, including humans. We are evolving right now and it can be measured. We can trace our ancestors back some 6 million years. If you don't
understand the concept of slow change over time, then you need to take an evolution 101 class or perhaps read a book about it. You can't criticize
something you don't understand.

The bible is not a science book, nor is it a veritably accurate source for anything. Sorry, the evidence points to evolution of ALL creatures on
earth, including humans. We are evolving right now and it can be measured. We can trace our ancestors back some 6 million years. If you don't
understand the concept of slow change over time, then you need to take an evolution 101 class or perhaps read a book about it. You can't criticize
something you don't understand.

Fine.

Just show me the proof that we traced our ancestors back 6 million years.

The bible is not a science book, nor is it a veritably accurate source for anything. Sorry, the evidence points to evolution of ALL creatures on
earth, including humans. We are evolving right now and it can be measured. We can trace our ancestors back some 6 million years. If you don't
understand the concept of slow change over time, then you need to take an evolution 101 class or perhaps read a book about it. You can't criticize
something you don't understand.

Fine.

Just show me the proof that we traced our ancestors back 6 million years.

Doesn't work like that anymore. You first prove that humans used to live close to 1,000 years.

We have mapped the genome of Neanderthals, Denisovans, and a newly found unknown species.

Just like all evolution it is slow change over time. No different from the rest of the animal kingdom. Humans didn't just pop up overnight. They
went from Ardi to lucy to habilis to humans. Ardi is one of the oldest hominids found that has human features like bipedalism.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.